Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.
Next, people are going to want a cheap iPad, cheap Mac (complete solution), etc. If you can't afford an iPhone then oh well. You can't always get what you want.
To my knowledge, the iPod Touch uses the same screen as the iPhone which is why you didn't notice any difference.
In many parts of the world, BMW and Mercedes are cheap. In Isreal you have those vehicles as taxis. Whether or not a product is a quality product is compared to the other products in the particular market. A cheaper made iPhone might be great for developing countries were Apple is getting its butt kicked in the market. I doubt this phone will be sold in the US.
Yeah, but all tests so far prove that *any* Apple processor of a particular year/version always beats out a Snapdragon processor of the same year/version.
It's hard to see why they would use anything other than their own processors which are heavily customised to the operating system anyway. I don't even see them using a very old Apple processor either. The iPad mini struggles mightily under the few restrictions it has for instance. Using anything older than last year's processor or anything from outside of the company would seem like a really foolish thing to do. It would make iOS look like crap and run like molasses.
Even if that were true (and my 4S is plenty fast almost all of the time, certainly never 'choppy'), it doesn't really change anything. So Apple could use the A5 in a low cost phone. Or wait until the A7 is out and use the A6. The cost difference between their own A-series chips and buying from someone else is probably miniscule, so I doubt that they'd go outside for their CPU.
Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.
BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.
And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800
maybe there isn't the capacity from the existing suppliers to increase production of A chips. Move to off the shelf silicon for the new phone so it doesn't impact the higher end products and it also provides more supplier choice (away from Samsung)
Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.
BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.
And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800
I'll say it again in case you're not listening... it's about the OS.
Having the fastest bestest whateverest in the other manufacturer's phones (if that truly is the case as you suggest) doesn't seem to be hurting the sale of the 5, 4S or even the 4.
I'll say it again in case you're not listening... it's about the OS.
Having the fastest bestest whateverest in the other manufacturer's phones (if that truly is the case as you suggest) doesn't seem to be hurting the sale of the 5, 4S or even the 4.
So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.
1) So we have an Apple in-house core. Designed and built from scratch to exactly match Apples specification, costing not a penny more than its cost price, plus a 3rd party modem. And then you have a generic soc designed with tens of partners in mind, sold for profit, with a built-in modem. I can't see the 2nd one providing a significant cost saving over the 1st.
2) Most decent games on IOS use a proprietary texture compression PVRTC, for textures. This does not exist as part of opengles2.0, and is ONLY available on imagination technology graphics cores. Qualcomm is NOT an imagination licencee. Apple would have to be resigned to thousands of games not being compatible with this cut-down iphone.
So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.
Do you know that for sure? [you said you were assuming]
[The answer to your "So?". - Your main argument seems to be about chip performance.]
Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.
BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.
And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800
Let me sum up...
I don't know. - Let me make a wild ass guess
Everything I'm writing is pure assumption -Here is begins my semi-informed hopeful wild assed guess... Nothing here is based on fact, purely based on my 'gut' and perception.
Sometime in the future(hopefully this year) The most expensive and state of the art Snapdragron may be the fastest on benchmarks. Yet we all know that benchmarks on phones mean nothing for 10s of millions of phone buyers. A couple absolutely need to bend pipes in simulations run on their phones, and these benchmarks will be important to them(me... not that I need to bend pipes, but I need the fastest... because... well... I can't have something slow... it's embarrassing )
The yet to be releasedS4 MAY BE faster than a 1.5 year old Apple Device. - I'm going out on a limb that Moore's law is at work... if the S4 does actually perform... See the 'I don't know'
So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.
I take it developing software quality for multiple hardware stacks cost nothing in your universe? And the fact that the AnX have been architected and tuned for iOS, thus the effort will be even harder ($$$).
All this to save... what... 20 to 30 cents per chip set (Remember, Apple's volumes are such that they instantly are your largest customer... and volume leverages become almost nil)? 99% of the cost of the chip is the 'making the chip' not the etch.
Or... dropping a $180 parts price to produce phone down to 179.70?
if it costs me $10Million for every code release to support this new HW architecture (remember testing EVERYTHING from fit/finish, to function(perf/heat/power/functional spec). $10 Million sounds like a lot, but that's 100 FTE. When you sell in 100+ countries, and at least that many carriers, I could see $10Million being pretty the scale (maybe $5Million, maybe $20Million). PER RELEASE.
Introducing new chips have to be very much about strategic path... forking your methods onto a 'cheap' chipset for 'saving money' on a low end phone (for a company that sells highend phones) is not strategy (Apple is not switching to SnapDragon for top of the line phones, ala switching to x86 for Macs).
Thus to argue cost savings on the order of pennies per phone, and creating long term systems complexity and risk... doesn't make sense.
Now Apple licensing from Qualcomm components for their future(next) Aseries chips... That makes total sense.
" will use a version of Qualcomm's Snapdragon system on a chip in a much-rumored low-cost iPhone, "
Would simply a further move into Apple branding. A bonus here should be better phone reception figuring that Apple never did seem to incorporate Samsung's energy efficient cellular modem tech into their phones.
I'll freely admit that I don't have any numbers handy and you guys raised some good points. Still, post #7 quoted some numbers that indicate the potential of significant savings by going for an off-the-shelf SOC. Hell, Apple could just buy Qualcomm
Also, the upcoming A7 may well be competitive with the Snapdragon 800 (though I doubt it; it'll be clocked at 2.3 Ghz per core and Apple are usually more conservative when it comes to clock speed), but as of right now, Qualcomm have the performance crown. And yeah, it's all about the software - I'm fairly sure an HTC One with the Snapdragon 600 wouldn't stutter like my 4S does typing this post.
EDIT: an the S4 Pro IS released, it's a quad-core SOC of middling quality (when compared to the 600 and 800).
But, if it's true,.... *cough* fragmentation *cough*.
That's part of what makes it BS. Sorry but no way would Apple switch chips for this when they have a lower level chip of their own in the A4, or even just stick with the A5 which they will still need to produce at even a small level to make service parts for the iPhones and iPads they are selling now for like the next 3-5 years cause of US repair laws among others. Or at least be able to produce.
Given this why switch to another chip all together for this alleged cheaper phone. They wouldn't.
This sounds like more of a tactic to get attention for Qualcomm or Snapdragon than anything close to truth
I believe all those rumours about a low cost iPhone are garbage. Just don't see this happening and Cook's remarks reaffirm this. Apple doesn't build garbage, Apple doesn't need developing markets, where people don't consume content and don't spend money on apps anyway, it is also the premium mentality that adds to Apple's overall image.
Apple is about making money so they always need new markets. So in that regard I disagree with you. However Apple has arranged alt buying plans for their existing phones to fit those markets. And heck China is one of the biggest grey markets for unlocked phones bought at US etc stores. So it appears they have no need to develop something just for them.
Plus there's the whole social-mental thing. Part of why these are developing countries and not just poor countries is because they are trying to pull themselves into the First World. Or at least the Second. It's mentally degrading in a way to be sold something cheapened to fit what they can afford that is clearly less than in quality, versus the affirming of helping them to buy the quality item. It's like the young kid that saves up to buy himself an iPad Mini rather than have his parents buy him a cheaper toy looking tablet his friends will mock him over. That kid did good work washing and walking dogs, mowing yards or whatever to make that money and got what he wanted. Rather than taking second beat as a act of charity. Even in developing countries they feel that kind of basic human feeling of pride in similar situations.
Plus if you get lucky and an opportunity to move away to a 'better' country for school or such happens you'd be behind the line and hobbled since that lesser tech can't do everything that your colleagues/classmates stuff can do and that can hurt you depending on your situation. And then there's how you are here with a second hand better model but your family is at home with the 'cheap' one and you can't FaceTime or some other feature cause they dont have cameras or the right processor. I don't see Apple doing that.
If Apple wants cheaper SoCs: build an own foundry. Apple needs 70K wafer starts each month. Its insane! That would occupy a whole Intel state of the art fab. Why not buy one of Global foundries factories. Especially since AMD cut wafer orders by 50%. (or buy an Intel fab since they are 50% idle because they lost 30% market share to ARM)
If that is true and Apple really is in talks with Intel that could be the reason. Maybe Apple is switching to Intel but they are going to produce A-SoC for Apple. Where are their foundries. If any are in US that could be a factor. Tim is trying to seems to work with Obama's desire to pull some tech production back to US to encourage develop of workers needed to maybe pull all of it, or as much as really feasible for US sold product at least, back here. Tim shows he's trying to play ball with the idea and Obama might scratch his back on the tax break to move the money back to the US. Or at least be more willing to consider something
Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.
You are absolutely correct. I can't see BMW or Lexus making a cheaper car, like say a Mini or a Toyota, that would be focused on a cheaper spectrum of the market.
It will have a plastic case, a processor from Qualcomm and a removable, replaceable battery. And a 6" screen with a slide-out physical keyboard. And it will make clacking noises so you can use it like a castanet and dance around with your friends.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Youarewrong
The A4 is a joke, even by low-end standards.
I don't know. My wife still use her iPhone 4 every day without complaints. Seems it's rather good for her business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Youarewrong
The A4 is a joke, even by low-end standards.
It's not so much about the chip... it's about the OS.
In many parts of the world, BMW and Mercedes are cheap. In Isreal you have those vehicles as taxis. Whether or not a product is a quality product is compared to the other products in the particular market. A cheaper made iPhone might be great for developing countries were Apple is getting its butt kicked in the market. I doubt this phone will be sold in the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Youarewrong
The A4 is a joke, even by low-end standards.
Yeah, but all tests so far prove that *any* Apple processor of a particular year/version always beats out a Snapdragon processor of the same year/version.
It's hard to see why they would use anything other than their own processors which are heavily customised to the operating system anyway. I don't even see them using a very old Apple processor either. The iPad mini struggles mightily under the few restrictions it has for instance. Using anything older than last year's processor or anything from outside of the company would seem like a really foolish thing to do. It would make iOS look like crap and run like molasses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Even if that were true (and my 4S is plenty fast almost all of the time, certainly never 'choppy'), it doesn't really change anything. So Apple could use the A5 in a low cost phone. Or wait until the A7 is out and use the A6. The cost difference between their own A-series chips and buying from someone else is probably miniscule, so I doubt that they'd go outside for their CPU.
Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.
BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.
And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800
maybe there isn't the capacity from the existing suppliers to increase production of A chips. Move to off the shelf silicon for the new phone so it doesn't impact the higher end products and it also provides more supplier choice (away from Samsung)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkettpolitur
Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.
BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.
And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800
I'll say it again in case you're not listening... it's about the OS.
Having the fastest bestest whateverest in the other manufacturer's phones (if that truly is the case as you suggest) doesn't seem to be hurting the sale of the 5, 4S or even the 4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
I'll say it again in case you're not listening... it's about the OS.
Having the fastest bestest whateverest in the other manufacturer's phones (if that truly is the case as you suggest) doesn't seem to be hurting the sale of the 5, 4S or even the 4.
So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.
1) So we have an Apple in-house core. Designed and built from scratch to exactly match Apples specification, costing not a penny more than its cost price, plus a 3rd party modem. And then you have a generic soc designed with tens of partners in mind, sold for profit, with a built-in modem. I can't see the 2nd one providing a significant cost saving over the 1st.
2) Most decent games on IOS use a proprietary texture compression PVRTC, for textures. This does not exist as part of opengles2.0, and is ONLY available on imagination technology graphics cores. Qualcomm is NOT an imagination licencee. Apple would have to be resigned to thousands of games not being compatible with this cut-down iphone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkettpolitur
So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.
Do you know that for sure? [you said you were assuming]
[The answer to your "So?". - Your main argument seems to be about chip performance.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkettpolitur
Really? I don't know the BOM but I'd assume that Apple's custom chips cost them more money than an off-the-shelf snapdragon.
BTW, an example of my 4S' choppiness: every time I use it to write a reply on these forums. The keyboard and autocorrect can hardly cope for some reason.
And to some of the other posters, snapdragons are awesome SOCs and Qualcomm is poised to take the performance crown this year with the Snapdragon 800. I wouldn't knock them - and I'd certainly have even the S4 Pro over the A5 in my 4S, let alone the 600 or the 800
Let me sum up...
I don't know. - Let me make a wild ass guess
Everything I'm writing is pure assumption - Here is begins my semi-informed hopeful wild assed guess... Nothing here is based on fact, purely based on my 'gut' and perception.
Sometime in the future(hopefully this year) The most expensive and state of the art Snapdragron may be the fastest on benchmarks. Yet we all know that benchmarks on phones mean nothing for 10s of millions of phone buyers. A couple absolutely need to bend pipes in simulations run on their phones, and these benchmarks will be important to them(me... not that I need to bend pipes, but I need the fastest... because... well... I can't have something slow... it's embarrassing )
The yet to be released S4 MAY BE faster than a 1.5 year old Apple Device. - I'm going out on a limb that Moore's law is at work... if the S4 does actually perform... See the 'I don't know'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkettpolitur
So? It's not as if Apple couldn't fine tune iOS to run smoothly on a Snapdragon that costs them less to implement than an AX. It's all about cost-cutting if they really want to make a cheaper iPhone.
I take it developing software quality for multiple hardware stacks cost nothing in your universe? And the fact that the AnX have been architected and tuned for iOS, thus the effort will be even harder ($$$).
All this to save... what... 20 to 30 cents per chip set (Remember, Apple's volumes are such that they instantly are your largest customer... and volume leverages become almost nil)? 99% of the cost of the chip is the 'making the chip' not the etch.
Or... dropping a $180 parts price to produce phone down to 179.70?
if it costs me $10Million for every code release to support this new HW architecture (remember testing EVERYTHING from fit/finish, to function(perf/heat/power/functional spec). $10 Million sounds like a lot, but that's 100 FTE. When you sell in 100+ countries, and at least that many carriers, I could see $10Million being pretty the scale (maybe $5Million, maybe $20Million). PER RELEASE.
Introducing new chips have to be very much about strategic path... forking your methods onto a 'cheap' chipset for 'saving money' on a low end phone (for a company that sells highend phones) is not strategy (Apple is not switching to SnapDragon for top of the line phones, ala switching to x86 for Macs).
Thus to argue cost savings on the order of pennies per phone, and creating long term systems complexity and risk... doesn't make sense.
Now Apple licensing from Qualcomm components for their future(next) Aseries chips... That makes total sense.
Would simply a further move into Apple branding.
A bonus here should be better phone reception figuring that Apple never did seem to incorporate Samsung's energy efficient cellular modem tech into their phones.
Curious how everyone keeps harping on Apple to produce low end devices then...?!
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/030813-google-will-cut-1200-more-267509.html
I'll freely admit that I don't have any numbers handy and you guys raised some good points. Still, post #7 quoted some numbers that indicate the potential of significant savings by going for an off-the-shelf SOC. Hell, Apple could just buy Qualcomm
Also, the upcoming A7 may well be competitive with the Snapdragon 800 (though I doubt it; it'll be clocked at 2.3 Ghz per core and Apple are usually more conservative when it comes to clock speed), but as of right now, Qualcomm have the performance crown. And yeah, it's all about the software - I'm fairly sure an HTC One with the Snapdragon 600 wouldn't stutter like my 4S does typing this post.
EDIT: an the S4 Pro IS released, it's a quad-core SOC of middling quality (when compared to the 600 and 800).
Quote:
Originally Posted by stike vomit
^ This.
The rumor smells like bullshit to me.
But, if it's true,.... *cough* fragmentation *cough*.
That's part of what makes it BS. Sorry but no way would Apple switch chips for this when they have a lower level chip of their own in the A4, or even just stick with the A5 which they will still need to produce at even a small level to make service parts for the iPhones and iPads they are selling now for like the next 3-5 years cause of US repair laws among others. Or at least be able to produce.
Given this why switch to another chip all together for this alleged cheaper phone. They wouldn't.
This sounds like more of a tactic to get attention for Qualcomm or Snapdragon than anything close to truth
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynic
I believe all those rumours about a low cost iPhone are garbage. Just don't see this happening and Cook's remarks reaffirm this. Apple doesn't build garbage, Apple doesn't need developing markets, where people don't consume content and don't spend money on apps anyway, it is also the premium mentality that adds to Apple's overall image.
Apple is about making money so they always need new markets. So in that regard I disagree with you. However Apple has arranged alt buying plans for their existing phones to fit those markets. And heck China is one of the biggest grey markets for unlocked phones bought at US etc stores. So it appears they have no need to develop something just for them.
Plus there's the whole social-mental thing. Part of why these are developing countries and not just poor countries is because they are trying to pull themselves into the First World. Or at least the Second. It's mentally degrading in a way to be sold something cheapened to fit what they can afford that is clearly less than in quality, versus the affirming of helping them to buy the quality item. It's like the young kid that saves up to buy himself an iPad Mini rather than have his parents buy him a cheaper toy looking tablet his friends will mock him over. That kid did good work washing and walking dogs, mowing yards or whatever to make that money and got what he wanted. Rather than taking second beat as a act of charity. Even in developing countries they feel that kind of basic human feeling of pride in similar situations.
Plus if you get lucky and an opportunity to move away to a 'better' country for school or such happens you'd be behind the line and hobbled since that lesser tech can't do everything that your colleagues/classmates stuff can do and that can hurt you depending on your situation. And then there's how you are here with a second hand better model but your family is at home with the 'cheap' one and you can't FaceTime or some other feature cause they dont have cameras or the right processor. I don't see Apple doing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa
If Apple wants cheaper SoCs: build an own foundry. Apple needs 70K wafer starts each month. Its insane! That would occupy a whole Intel state of the art fab. Why not buy one of Global foundries factories. Especially since AMD cut wafer orders by 50%. (or buy an Intel fab since they are 50% idle because they lost 30% market share to ARM)
If that is true and Apple really is in talks with Intel that could be the reason. Maybe Apple is switching to Intel but they are going to produce A-SoC for Apple. Where are their foundries. If any are in US that could be a factor. Tim is trying to seems to work with Obama's desire to pull some tech production back to US to encourage develop of workers needed to maybe pull all of it, or as much as really feasible for US sold product at least, back here. Tim shows he's trying to play ball with the idea and Obama might scratch his back on the tax break to move the money back to the US. Or at least be more willing to consider something
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
Well its just the fact that Apple is going to make something really cheap, using cheap parts. This isn't what Apple does. Apple is a premium brand and using cheap parts to lower the cost isn't going to increase the value of Apple's brand. This would be like BMW or Lexus making a cheap car made with very cheap parts just to serve a lower end market. This whole cheap phone doesn't make any sense to me and I think is taking Apple in the wrong direction.
You are absolutely correct. I can't see BMW or Lexus making a cheaper car, like say a Mini or a Toyota, that would be focused on a cheaper spectrum of the market.
It will have a plastic case, a processor from Qualcomm and a removable, replaceable battery. And a 6" screen with a slide-out physical keyboard. And it will make clacking noises so you can use it like a castanet and dance around with your friends.